This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: type consistency of gimple
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck at naturalbridge dot com>, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, GCC <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Hubicha, Jan" <jh at suse dot cz>, "Edelsohn, David" <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>, Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:53:00 -0400
- Subject: Re: type consistency of gimple
- References: <44DCEAAA.9000306@naturalbridge.com> <84fc9c000608111344l3cc4b9f0w97f104da6ed5b7ad@mail.gmail.com> <44DCEDF1.9010902@naturalbridge.com> <84fc9c000608111356n6bd522d5gd349007fdcb0cd1b@mail.gmail.com> <44DCF0A0.1060005@naturalbridge.com> <44DF6702.4060901@codesourcery.com> <44E074F4.3050402@dberlin.org>
Daniel Berlin wrote on 08/14/06 09:04:
> If this is a cleanup we actually want done, IMHO, we should do it first.
>
Agreed. This is a good opportunity for us to design a GIMPLE type
system. Besides the obvious space savings and cleanliness, it is also
needed to remove lang_hooks.types_compatible_p.
Jeff's point about our optimizers is also true. Nick, remember that
issue with MIPS optimizations you were discussing with Jeff a few days
ago? I didn't follow most of the details, but it involved ivopts and
sign issues. Could you send a summary?
If we had a GIMPLE type-system, we could allow the implicit type
conversions. However, having implicit type conversions implies having
types associated with expression tree leaves. Space-wise, it's best if
we can have types at expression tree roots.